On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 6:35 AM Peter Georg peter.georg@physik.uni-regensburg.de wrote:
On 24/05/2021 22.32, Patrick Riehecky wrote:
I'm loving the ideas/thoughts/etc here!
Perhaps, we could add a Roadmap item for non-GPLv2 stuff? Personally, there are just a few items that I'd love to have which are not GPLv2. I'd hate to block on sorting this out now, when I suspect there will be some more input/concerns/etc.
Pat
Coming back to this question / licensing issue as it seems to be the last open question concerning this SIG proposal and Rich asked me to have a final draft ready by June 2nd:
Currently I see two possible options:
- Add a restriction for out-of-tree kernel modules "to out-of-tree
kernel modules with a GPL v2 compatible license". Assuming that this is the current official policy and it won't change in a foreseeable future.
- Add a more vague statement about out-of-tree kernel modules, i.e.
something like "restricted to out-of-tree kernel modules with cetrain licenses due to legal constraints". This probably means that effectively the same restriction to "GPLv2 compatible" applies for now, but no modifications are required in case the official policy concerning kernel module licenses changes in the future.
Opinions?
Option 1 is pretty much the only one I would expect that you'll get endorsement from the Board on. I would expect that it would be problematic for them to approve something that they know could lead to that kind of problem, especially given how much license compliance matters to *this* audience in particular.
-- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!